OK how did our crack media outlets miss out on this story I found on BBC news?

Like usual our media is obsessed with the sensational stories, faux outrage, and politically motivated opinions instead of real news. It seems it’s much more important that the president reminded Nevadans that they allow gambling in their state than to worry about global security. So obviously it’s just not important enough to our failed forth estate that Israel may not bomb Iran after all.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told state TV that Iran would have “no problem” if most of its stock was held for several months before being returned as fuel rods.

Correspondents say that such a decision would be a major shift in Tehran’s position.

The US said that if this was a new offer, it was “prepared to listen”.

Last month, diplomats said Iran had informed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it did not accept the terms of the deal and had instead demanded a simultaneous exchange on its territory.

The US and its allies fear Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Iran insists its nuclear programme is entirely peaceful.

‘Definitive answer’

The deal agreed in October between Iran, the IAEA and the so-called P5+1 – the US, Russia, China, UK, France plus Germany – envisaged Iran sending about 70% of its low-enriched uranium to Russia and France, where it would be processed into fuel for a research reactor.

59 Responses so far.

I suppose many countries have had their fill of Iran’s broken list of promises, so I’m not surprised to hear that Europe is skeptical about this latest news out of the country, once bitten, twice shy as the saying goes.

In some ways this reminds me of the Iraq situation. The UN sanctions are moving ahead no matter what because the machinery is rolling. So even if Iran really does want to comply now the UN again is working itself into a corner. I know Ahmadinejad is probably just trying to game the system to delay the sanctions but I’m not sure the West will have a clue when and if Iran really changes it’s mind about militarizing it’s Uranium stores.

The real problem is this whole thing is being negotiated in public and in this media age NOTHING gets accomplished negotiating with the new media involved.

It’s more than likely what most countries think it is, stalling. I doubt very much from their previous displays of defiance that they are serious and many countries are agreed that there should be further sanction, Russia was even on board, of course China never is. I don’t think that the UN really has that much choice on the matter when the countries involved have already decided this is what they want.

China never does anything that interrupts their commercial interests. They are like the Ferengi country now. It’s amazing how China went from Communism straight to capitalist Fascism with almost no transition in between.

I know the sanctions will go through but to what end. It will probably only end up hurting the Iranian people most and will do nothing to lessen the threat.

Obviously it’s not near as bad as Iraq, that would be hyperbole. But it just is deja vu all over again the way the West is handling the issue.

I used what little space in my Democratic Party congressional survey to add -- “No sanctions. Cannot target Revolutionary Guards without hurting people and Green Movement.”

Your other point on the tragedy of if they really were to be acting in good faith is also what I’ve thought of many times. We’re in a bad relationship, us and Iran, and we keep going through the same motions again, and again, almost out of habit. We’ve already told the other what they’re gonna do and defined them. Seriously, we need an international relationship counselor to stop our mutually abusive codependent cycle. I hate you… don’t leave me!

And finally, you were spot on. Any meaningful negotiations that we’ve ever had with Iran are in private. Anything you see should make you suspicious merely by being in the media. What we are left with is to discern the smoke signals and scrye the mirrors -- triangulating, as much as possible, what is really going on.

I think that the U.S. said that if Iran were serious in their offer, they would be prepared to listen. Europe who has been much more involved from the start are seeing it as another “smoke and mirrors” move and have had much more experience with one on one negotiations with Iran in the past few years.

Quite frankly I was upset when they were allowed to join the Security Council only to become the country of “NO” like your GOP. Look how long they held out with N. Korea, they blocked the other 5 countries every step of the way because they were more worried about an influx of N. Korean refugees than the fact that they had WMD’s.

Sanctions may not be the best solution K, but what other options does the west have with the Iranian hard liners hanging on by the seat of their pants and the butt of their guns against an ever growing dissatisfaction with the government by it’s citizens, they are afraid to show any weakness now. The west has had years of this hot and cold no resolution talks with Iran so the message to the Mullahs and I’madinnerjacket is clear, if you snooze, you lose.

I totally agree about China. Like you said they especially hurt efforts by South Korea, Japan and the West in dealing with North Korea. There’s no doubt in my mind that China secretly helped NK with it’s nuclear program.

You’re right about sanctions as well. It’s really the only “stick” the UN has but I wish the UN knew how to use “carrots” better so the sanctions would not hurt the people.

I think it’s also in part because the Tehran research reactor is actually going to be running out of fuel in 2010, approximately, so the reactor ought to shut down and that’s the only facility in Iran that makes medical isotopes.

However; the response from Europe as reported by The Guardian is not what mine would have been. The West still hasn’t learned to “speak Persian”. Toy with him back, string him along and put the pressure on him to deliver in the face of fractious politics among his own countrymen. What’s to lose? This is the kind of reaction he counts on. And sadly, they know how to play us like a fiddle (or tar, to fit my point).

I’m curious about what prompted this change of heart. I thought Ahmedinejad’s popularity was based on his defiance of the west, so it would behoove him to defy and deny, no matter what (gee, that sounds familiar).

Not that he is still very popular there, considering what’s going on in the streets.

The game he plays is much more sophisticated. And, Ahmadinejad has some interesting maverick quirks to him -- I can appreciate his appeal originally and to his continued followers. He’s not two-dimensional; he’s an outsider (well, sort of). A reactionary, to be sure; but paradoxically, a deal with the West could also be seen as a prize for his pr

That may be part of the reason. I think with all the unrest there his reputation has been seriously damaged. He knows the unrest has been televised so he knows he is postulating to the rest of the world. It is a good deal to take. He can show by releasing the low-enriched uranium to another state/country that he is truly developing on a energy based platform after all. Or……………..it could be a ruse to take the spotlight off his country while they go about their business. The pendulum swings both ways in my suspicious mind.

I’m waiting to hear from Jalili, Mehmanparast, an aide/mouthpiece close to Khamene’i, or a corroborating signal from a rival political faction -- especially Ali Larijani (who held the post of Jalili) echoing this.

I remember when the original deal had an air of inevitability and champagne bottles were ready to be uncorked. It was too good to be true. Then a week or two ago, Turkey was floated. The details on this ‘new’ deal were more sketchy and abstract.

This looks to still be subject to infighting (which is what killed the last deal -- the reformists using it to attack Ahmadinejad, in fact). With Iran I never say never and do hope. I can only imagine what the State Department is considering now. Ahmadinejad also threw in what could be a poison pill -- an offer to exchange Iranian prisoners and ‘defectors’ they claim were kidnapped for our three hikers.

Ahmadi may be going rogue on this, or he may be floating something. And it may be another calculated move to discredit us as we’ve geared up sanctions, had a spat with China, and deployed missile systems into the Gulf -- thus catching us on our heels.

In short, it is not up to Ahmadinejad to accept a deal. The question is: at whose behest and for what purpose is he saying this? I can’t help but feel this is all conspicuously timed as Bahman 22 (Victory of the Revolution Day) is gearing up. Coincidence?

Very interesting Khirad. I definitely bookmarked the site. It will be interesting to see their take on things that happen here. And it is owned by Iran State TV? Amazing. I might need you as a translator for some stories though, as far as bias might go. Thanks. I am always looking for different news outlets. I like the BBC the best. The Brits are no nonsense people it would seem. I must admit I like different foreign accents too. Might seem to be a strange thing to like, but I do.

It’s like China’s Xinhua. It’s their answer to BBC Persian. They broadcast in the UK, and came under fire after the protests. Yes, they are owned by Iran’s main propaganda organ, and ultimately answer to the Supreme Leader.

Read it with care. And they have funny stories on decadent and depraved immoral American culture from time to time, as well. One made me laugh castigating us for our problem with prostitution -- even though certain streets of Tehran are every bit notorious as the West Hollywood strip. During their coverage of World Cup qualifying they cropped out all the green wristbands, etc. It can be quite hilarious. Still you may get perspectives that are valuable as long as you keep in mind at all times it’s Iranian state media, though not as directly controlled as others -- and to read it like you read our media, i.e., between the lines.

That’s what I was thinking when I first saw the story after reading your previous posts about Iran. He may be doing this for internal politics. Because of your posts we now know his power is very limited in making these final decisions. I really am commenting on our atrocious media. That’s the problem with our media. The experts know his power is limited so on this story they bury it but if he made a derogatory comment toward the US or Israel it would be front page news like he’s the surpreme leader of Iran

Many more informed I agree but it’s relative as well. About 5% might have known that before but even a five fold increase means most Americans are ill informed. Let’s face it the GOP fear mongering is targeting the Faux News informed and ill informed voters.

K, I read about this last night before I went to sleep, so your lazy and dishonest media had more than enough time to pick up this story. Amazing really after all the negatives news about Iran for the last few years. Your media are living in the same bubble they peddle for your citizens and if they think it doesn’t directly affect America and therefore not newsworthy, they are bonkers. Out of sight, out of mind!

Actually this article was in the margin of the BBC article you linked in the morning blog. BBC News is the only real news I get these days it seems. Fortunately the BBC has a widget I read every day on my cell phone too.

No spin with the BBC article is refreshing as well. Even the AP spins every story now printing headlines like ‘Obama’s words fail to bridge health care divide’. How do they even know yet what effect his Q and A had? But of course the MSM does not want to lose the ad money from profitcare so they spin every development into healthcare reform is dead like they helped kill the public option.

Seems that your media has absolutely no finesse when it comes to headlines or content of story. For them when they milk the negatives for all they are worth, it eventually becomes a Hollywood “B” movie script instead of news.